Jul 2026· AIware· pp. 380-387· 2 citations· 18 references
Computer Science
TL;DR
AgentTelemetry, an open-source benchmark suite and toolkit for evaluating fault detection in agent systems, and an ablation study proves all nine span kinds are necessary: removing any one makes at least one fault type undetectable.
Abstract
LLM-based autonomous agents fail in ways that existing observability infrastructure cannot detect. OpenTelemetry’s GenAI semantic conventions cover LLM invocation and tool execution but leave five critical agent orchestration phases—planning, reasoning, safety monitoring, inter-agent delegation, and memory management—without span-level representation. We present AgentTelemetry, an open-source benchmark suite and toolkit for evaluating fault detection in agent systems. The benchmark defines (1) a taxonomy of 14 fault types mapped to 9 agent-specific span kinds, (2) a controlled evaluation harness of 490 fault-detection cells (14 faults × 5 observability conditions × 7 frameworks; enumerated as 2,940 raw configurations across 6 mock-LLM seeds), and (3) a pip-installable library (3,700+ LOC, 78 tests) with adapters for seven frameworks. On the controlled benchmark, the full span taxonomy achieves a Fault Detection Rate (FDR) of 1.000—an upper bound confirming structural completeness—compared to 0.429 for vanilla OpenTelemetry and OTel+GenAI. An ablation study proves all nine span kinds are necessary: removing any one makes at least one fault type undetectable. A case study on 112 SWE-bench Lite instances reveals that 84/112 agent runs (75%) exhausted the 8-iteration limit and are classified as reasoning loops by structural pattern (a definitional partition of the failed-trace population, not a sampling estimate)—a failure mode invisible to vanilla OTel—and a telemetry-guided intervention improves the patch rate by +12.5 pp over a matched control (Fisher’s exact p=0.53, two-sided; demonstrative not statistically significant at n=24). All code, data, and benchmark configurations are open-source for reproducibility.
DeepDebug achieves the best strict attribution accuracy among the evaluated methods on both tested open-weight backbones, reaching 28.8 percent exact agent-and-step accuracy on qwen3.5-9b versus 21.7 percent for the strongest single-pass baseline.
Kunlun Zhu, Xuyan Ye, Zhi-Guang Han et al.· arXiv.org· 3 citations
AGENTCHAOSBENCH is presented, a benchmark for detecting and localizing runtime faults in agentic systems from their execution telemetry, and its held-out labels and compact prediction format support reproducible comparison of LLM-based and non-LLM diagnosis methods.
Chenkai Zhang, Yiran Li, Yifang Tian et al.· 0 citations
RedAgentBench is introduced, an executable framework for autonomous red-teaming and faithful measurement that shows that executable evaluation can improve safety measurement and identify actionable intervention points.
Zixing Chen, Xingyuan Liu, Jie Zhu et al.· 1 citation
Multi-agent systems built on large language models (LLMs) are increasingly deployed for complex tasks requiring autonomous planning, tool use, and inter-agent coordination. However, the non-deterministic nature of LLM outputs and the emergent behavior arising from agent interactions render traditional test oracles ineffective, creating a critical gap in quality assurance for agentic AI. This work introduces MORPHAGENT, a framework designed to address the oracle problem in multi-agent LLM systems through trace-based behavioral analysis. Our contributions are threefold: (1) goal-preservation relations that verify consistent goal achievement under input perturbations, (2) coordination-consistency relations that validate inter-agent delegation and communication patterns under agent substitution and reordering, and (3) tool-use integrity relations that ensure semantic equivalence of tool invocation sequences under prompt paraphrasing. MorphAgent instruments agent execution to capture structured traces comprising planning steps, tool calls, message exchanges, and final outputs, then systematically applies metamorphic transformations and checks behavioral invariants without requiring ground-truth oracles. We evaluate the framework on four multi-agent benchmarks spanning code generation, research synthesis, customer service, and data analysis tasks, encompassing 2,840 source-followup execution pairs across three LLM backends. Results show that MORPHAGENT detects 82.0% of seeded behavioral faults, including 90.3% of coordination failures and 81.7% of goal-deviation faults, while maintaining a false positive rate of 6.1%. The framework uncovers 14 previously unreported behavioral anomalies in established multi-agent frameworks, demonstrating its practical utility for assuring agentic AI reliability. These results suggest that trace-based metamorphic testing can serve as a practical foundation for reliable validation of emerging agentic AI systems.
Gopalakrishnan Marimuthu· International Conference on...· 0 citations
Existing evaluation frameworks mostly assess only one part of AI agents, such as task completion (AgentBench) or security robustness (AgentDojo, ASB), rather than the complete pipeline of planning, tool selection, tool execution, memory and reasoning. Failures can occur at any stage, yet existing benchmarks rarely identify their precise source. AgentAudit evaluates the entire execution trace across ten capability, grounding, security and behavioural dimensions, namely instruction integrity, planner, memory, tool selection, tool invocation, tool correctness, alignment, tool faithfulness, security and execution integrity, combined with behavioural classification and failure attribution to pinpoint the exact stage responsible for an observed failure. AgentAudit can evaluate any LLM-based AI agent, since it attaches to the agent instead of replacing it. It reads only the recorded execution trace and does not interfere with how the agent runs, so it places no constraint on the agent's internal implementation. We evaluate five language models (OpenAI GPT-5, Claude Sonnet 5, Sarvam 105B, Llama 3.3 70B and Gemini 2.5 Flash) across nine capability and adversarial tasks. Claude Sonnet 5 and GPT-5 obtain the highest mean Composite Trust Scores (95.1 and 80.6 out of 100, respectively), while Sarvam 105B, Llama 3.3 70B and Gemini 2.5 Flash trail substantially (57.6, 45.7 and 22.6). All traces were scored by a single fixed judge model, which was itself one of the evaluated models, a limitation discussed in Section VII.E. More importantly, models with similar task-completion behaviour can diverge sharply in trustworthiness, as several non-frontier models are repeatedly classified Unsafe_Compliance on adversarial tasks rather than merely failing them, a distinction that pass/fail benchmarks cannot surface.
Shrey Nag, Sachita, Abhishek Kumar Singh et al.· 0 citations
NetConfArena is presented, an executable benchmark for evaluating LLM agents in closed-loop network configuration, and its findings suggest two future directions: using validated trajectories as supervision signals to improve foundation models, and designing harness mechanisms that make agent execution more reliable and accountable.
Chang Liu, Xiaohui Xie, Xinyi Chen et al.· 0 citations
We use cookies to run the site and, with your consent, for analytics and to show ads.
See our Cookie Policy.
